HomeMy WebLinkAboutSuWa223sec9-12ptAAlaska Resources Library & Information Services
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Document
ARLIS Uniform Cover Page
Title:
Study of fish passage barriers in the middle and upper Susitna River and
Susitna tributaries, Study plan Section 9.12 : Initial study report -- Part A:
Sections 1-6, 8-10
SuWa 223
Author(s) – Personal:
Author(s) – Corporate:
R2 Resource Consultants, Inc.
AEA-identified category, if specified:
Initial study report
AEA-identified series, if specified:
Series (ARLIS-assigned report number):
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project document number 223
Existing numbers on document:
Published by:
[Anchorage : Alaska Energy Authority, 2014]
Date published:
June 2014
Published for:
Alaska Energy Authority
Date or date range of report:
Volume and/or Part numbers:
Final or Draft status, as indicated:
Document type:
Pagination:
iv, 29 p.
Related work(s):
The following parts of Section 9.12 appear in separate files:
Part A ; Part A Appendices ; Part B ; Part C.
Pages added/changed by ARLIS:
Notes:
All reports in the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Document series include an ARLIS-
produced cover page and an ARLIS-assigned number for uniformity and citability. All reports
are posted online at http://www.arlis.org/resources/susitna-watana/
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project
(FERC No. 14241)
Study of Fish Passage Barriers in the Middle and
Upper Susitna River and Susitna Tributaries
Study Plan Section 9.12
Initial Study Report
Part A: Sections 1-6, 8-10
Prepared for
Alaska Energy Authority
Prepared by
R2 Resource Consultants, Inc.
June 2014
INITIAL STUDY REPORT STUDY OF FISH PASSAGE BARRIERS IN THE
MIDDLE AND UPPER SUSITNA RIVER AND SUSITNA TRIBUTARIES (9.12)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Part A - Page i June 2014
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 1
2. Study Objectives................................................................................................................ 2
3. Study Area ......................................................................................................................... 3
4. Methods .............................................................................................................................. 4
4.1. Fish Species Identification ...................................................................................... 4
4.1.1. Variances......................................................................................... 5
4.2. Passage Criteria for the Identified Fish Species ..................................................... 5
4.2.1. Depth Criteria for Adult Upstream Migration ................................ 6
4.2.2. Leaping Criteria for Adult Upstream Migration ............................. 6
4.2.3. Upstream Velocity Criteria ............................................................. 6
4.2.4. Downstream Passage Criteria ......................................................... 6
4.3. Site Selection .......................................................................................................... 6
4.3.1. Upper River Tributaries .................................................................. 6
4.3.2. Middle River Tributaries within and above Devil’s Canyon .......... 7
4.3.3. Middle River below Devil’s Canyon .............................................. 7
4.3.4. Lower River .................................................................................... 7
4.3.5. Modeling Sites ................................................................................ 8
4.3.6. Variances......................................................................................... 8
4.4. Field Methods ......................................................................................................... 8
4.4.1. Geologic Barriers to Fish Passage .................................................. 9
4.4.2. Beaver Dams ................................................................................... 9
4.4.3. Tributary Mouths .......................................................................... 10
4.4.4. Data Analysis ................................................................................ 10
4.4.5. Variances....................................................................................... 11
4.5. Modeling Methods ................................................................................................ 11
4.5.1. Modeling Methods for Ice-free Periods ........................................ 11
4.5.2. Modeling Methods for Ice-cover Periods ..................................... 12
4.5.3. Variances....................................................................................... 12
5. Results .............................................................................................................................. 12
5.1. Geologic Barriers .................................................................................................. 12
5.2. Beaver Dams ......................................................................................................... 12
INITIAL STUDY REPORT STUDY OF FISH PASSAGE BARRIERS IN THE
MIDDLE AND UPPER SUSITNA RIVER AND SUSITNA TRIBUTARIES (9.12)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Part A - Page ii June 2014
5.3. Tributary Mouths .................................................................................................. 13
6. Discussion......................................................................................................................... 13
7. Completing the Study ..................................................................................................... 13
8. Literature Cited .............................................................................................................. 14
9. Tables ............................................................................................................................... 16
10. Figures .............................................................................................................................. 24
INITIAL STUDY REPORT STUDY OF FISH PASSAGE BARRIERS IN THE
MIDDLE AND UPPER SUSITNA RIVER AND SUSITNA TRIBUTARIES (9.12)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Part A - Page iii June 2014
LIST OF TABLES
Table 4.1- 1. HSC curve development priority and fish passage (ISR Study 9.11) priority species
list. ......................................................................................................................................... 16
Table 4.2- 1. Pacific salmon leaping height capabilities from three sources. ............................... 17
Table 4.3- 1. Potential geologic barriers evaluated in the Upper Susitna River in 2013 and in
2012 as reported in HDR Alaska, Inc. 2013 ................................................................................. 18
Table 4.3- 2 Potential geologic barriers evaluated in the Middle Susitna River in 2013 and in
2012 as reported in HDR Alaska, Inc. 2013. ................................................................................ 19
Table 4.3- 3. Major tributary mouths in the Middle River selected for fish passage barrier
investigation in Study ................................................................................................................... 22
Table 4.3- 4. Tally of off-channel habitats and tributary mouths in Middle River Focus Areas
targeted for data collection to support ice-free modeling by ISR Study 8.5................................. 23
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 3- 1. Susitna River Study Area .......................................................................................... 24
Figure 4.2- 1. Depth/distance passage criteria for chum salmon in unobstructed uniform channels
with smaller substrates. Source ADF&G 1984b. .................................................................. 25
Figure 4.2- 2. Depth/distance passage criteria for chum salmon in obstructed non-uniform
channels with larger substrates. (ADF&G 1984a). ............................................................... 26
Figure 4.3-1 a. Locations of all Upper River tributaries examined for barrier analysis in 2012 and
2013. ...................................................................................................................................... 27
Figure 4.3-1 b. Locations of all Middle River tributary mouths examined in 2013 and planned for
the next year of the study. ..................................................................................................... 28
Figure 5.2- 1. Locations of beaver dams identified by aerial and ground surveys in the Middle
River. ..................................................................................................................................... 29
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Tributary Geologic Barriers
Appendix B: Middle River Tributary Delta Surveys Outside of Focus Areas
INITIAL STUDY REPORT STUDY OF FISH PASSAGE BARRIERS IN THE
MIDDLE AND UPPER SUSITNA RIVER AND SUSITNA TRIBUTARIES (9.12)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Part A - Page iv June 2014
LIST OF ACRONYMS, ABBREVIATIONS, AND DEFINITIONS
Abbreviation Definition
ADF&G Alaska Department of Fish and Game
AEA Alaska Energy Authority
ARRC Alaska Railroad Corporation
cfs cubic feet per second
CIRWG Cook Inlet Region Working Group
CP check point
FA Focus Area
FERC Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
GIS geographic information system
GPS global positioning system
HSC Habitat Suitability Criteria
ILP Integrated Licensing Process
N/A not applicable or not available
NMFS National Marine Fisheries Service
PRM Project River Mile
Project Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project
RM river mile
ROW right-of-way
RSP Revised Study Plan
RTK Real time kinematic
SPD study plan determination
TBM temporary benchmark
TWG Technical Workgroup
USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
USGS United States Geologic Survey
ZHI zone of hydrologic influence
INITIAL STUDY REPORT STUDY OF FISH PASSAGE BARRIERS IN THE
MIDDLE AND UPPER SUSITNA RIVER AND SUSITNA TRIBUTARIES (9.12)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Part A - Page 1 June 2014
1. INTRODUCTION
On December 14, 2012, Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) filed its Revised Study Plan (RSP) with
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission) for the Susitna-Watana
Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 14241, which included 58 individual study plans (AEA
2012). Included within the RSP was the Study of Fish Passage Barriers in the Middle and Upper
Susitna River and Susitna Tributaries, Section 9.12. RSP Section 9.12 focuses on the methods for
locating, describing, and assessing potential fish passage barriers in the Middle and Upper
Susitna River that could be created or eliminated as a result of Project construction and
operation. RSP Section 9.12 provides goals, objectives, and proposed methods for identification,
classification, measurement, and analysis of potential fish passage barriers.
On February 1, 2013, FERC staff issued its study plan determination (February 1 SPD) for 44 of
the 58 studies, approving 31 studies as filed and 13 with modifications. RSP Section 9.12 was
one of the 13 approved with modifications. In its February 1 SPD, FERC recommended the
following:
We recommend that AEA assess discharge conditions at the streamflow gages established
by AEA closest to Devils Canyon and near the dam site during the time periods when
salmon are documented to successfully pass upstream of the Devils Canyon passage
impediment in 2013 and 2014 (via radio-tagging as set forth in study 9.7, salmon
escapement), and document the results in the initial and updated study reports.
We do not recommend use of any of AEA’s criteria set forth in section 9.12.4.4 of the RSP
for excluding study sites from the Middle River passage barrier evaluation. Instead, we
recommend that AEA prepare and file a detailed plan by no later than June 15, 2013,
that provides the additional information described below on implementation of the study
within the Middle River study area.
1) A specific schedule for completing the following Middle River study components
proposed for future development in consultation with the TWG as set forth in section
9.12.4 of the RSP: (a) identifying fish species to be included in the passage barrier study;
(b) defining the passage criteria for the identified fish species; (c) selecting the number
and location of study sites for each element of study implementation; and (d) filing the
results of items (a), (b), and (c).
2) A description of how the effects of load-following during the winter ice-cover period
on salmonid juvenile and fry passage (e.g., depth, velocity, potential ice blockages) from
mainstem into off-channel habitats would be evaluated.
3) A description of the specific methods as set forth in section 9.12.4.5 (e.g., 2-
dimensional modeling, or other unspecified modeling approach) that would be applied at
the off-channel and tributary mouth locations selected for the depth barrier analysis. This
would include an explanation of the proposed methods and study sites for the open-water
period for adult and juvenile fish, and the ice-cover period for juvenile fish.
INITIAL STUDY REPORT STUDY OF FISH PASSAGE BARRIERS IN THE
MIDDLE AND UPPER SUSITNA RIVER AND SUSITNA TRIBUTARIES (9.12)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Part A - Page 2 June 2014
4) A description of a subsample of tributary mouths and off-channel habitat entrances
within Middle River focus areas where velocity measurements will be taken to determine
if velocity barriers to juvenile salmonids (particularly salmonid fry) would be created at
tributary mouths and off-channel habitat entrances by modifications to river stage and
discharge through proposed project operations.
5) Documentation that a draft plan and schedule were provided to FWS, NMFS, and any
other TWG participants at least 30 days prior to the due date of the plan and schedule
(allowing at least 15 days for comment); a description of how FWS’, NMFS’, or other
TWG participant’s comments are incorporated into the final plan; and an explanation for
why any of FWS’, NMFS’, or other TWG participant’s comments are not incorporated
into the final plan.
In accordance with the February 1 SPD, on May 15, 2013, AEA provided to U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS), National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), and other Technical
Work Group participants for comment a Draft Study of Fish Barriers Implementation Plan (Draft
Implementation Plan) that was developed to provide responses to the February 1 SPD
recommendations. The Draft Implementation Plan was also made available on the Project
website (http://www.susitna-watanahydro.org). Consistent with the February 1 SPD, AEA
initially allowed 15 days for comment by requesting that all comments be submitted, in writing,
by Thursday, May 30, 2013. At the request of NMFS, AEA extended the deadline for comments
to June 5, 2013. NMFS and USFWS jointly submitted comments on June 7, 2013. AEA received
no other comments on the Draft Implementation Plan. Recommended modifications were
addressed in detail in the Study of Fish Barriers Implementation Plan (Implementation Plan)
filed with FERC on June 17, 2013.
Following the first study season, FERC’s regulations for the Integrated Licensing Process (ILP)
require AEA to “prepare and file with the Commission an initial study report describing its
overall progress in implementing the study plan and schedule and the data collected, including an
explanation of any variance from the study plan and schedule” (18 CFR 5.15(c)(1)). This Initial
Study Report (ISR) on the Fish Passage Barriers in the Middle and Upper Susitna River and
Susitna Tributaries has been prepared in accordance with FERC’s ILP regulations and details
AEA’s status in implementing the study, as set forth in the FERC-approved RSP and as modified
by FERC’s February 1 SPD, and the Implementation Plan (collectively referred to herein as the
“Study Plan”).
2. STUDY OBJECTIVES
The goal of this study is to evaluate the potential effects of Project-induced changes in flow and
water surface elevation on free access of fish into, within, and out of suitable habitats in the
Upper Susitna River (inundation zone above the Watana Dam site) and the Middle Susitna River
(Watana Dam site to the confluence of Chulitna and Talkeetna rivers). This goal is being
achieved by meeting the following objectives:
INITIAL STUDY REPORT STUDY OF FISH PASSAGE BARRIERS IN THE
MIDDLE AND UPPER SUSITNA RIVER AND SUSITNA TRIBUTARIES (9.12)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Part A - Page 3 June 2014
1. Locate and categorize all existing fish passage barriers (e.g., falls, cascade, beaver dam,
road or railroad crossings) located in selected tributaries in the Middle and Upper Susitna
River (Middle River tributaries to be determined during study refinement).
2. Locate using geographic information system (GPS), identify the type (permanent,
temporary, seasonal, partial), and characterize the physical nature of any existing fish
barriers located within the Project’s ZHI.
3. Evaluate the potential changes to existing fish barriers (both natural and man-made)
located within the Project’s ZHI.
4. Evaluate the potential creation of fish passage barriers within existing habitats
(tributaries, sloughs, side channels, off-channel habitats) related to future flow conditions,
water surface elevations, and sediment transport.
These objectives are being met through the use of existing information, consulting with the Fish
and Aquatic Technical Working Group (TWG) and other licensing participants, and by using the
methods described in the Study Plan.
3. STUDY AREA
The study area includes the mainstem and selected tributaries in the Upper and Middle segments
of the Susitna River that would be affected by construction and operation of the Project (Figure
3-1). For purposes of this study, the study area has been divided into two segments:
• Upper River—Susitna River and selected tributaries within this segment extend from the
Proposed Watana Dam site (RM 184 [PRM 187.1]) to the upper extent of the Proposed
Watana Reservoir Maximum Pool (PRM 232.5; see Figure 3.1.1). In tributaries known to
support Chinook salmon, barriers were surveyed to 3000-ft elevation unless a permanent
impassable barrier existed between 2,200 and 3,000 ft elevation. If a barrier existed
within this range, surveys stopped at the barrier.
• Middle River—Susitna River and selected tributaries within this segment extend from the
Proposed Watana Dam site to the lower extent of Devils Canyon [PRM 153.9]. In all
tributaries, barriers were surveyed to 3000-ft elevation or to the first anadromous barrier.
• Middle River below Devil’s Canyon - Passage studies in the mainstem Middle River
included sloughs, upland sloughs, side channels, and tributary mouths. Passage studies in
tributaries to the Middle River included select tributaries and extended from the mouth to
the upper limit of the zone of hydrologic influence (ZHI) for each tributary, The ZHI is
defined as a 1.5-year recurrence flow interval (38,500 cubic feet per second [cfs] at Gold
Creek. 1
1 The Study Area has been corrected from the RSP and expanded beyond Middle River tributaries to include
sloughs, upland sloughs, and side channels that have been surveyed and will be subject to 2-D modeling as
described in ISRs 8.5 and 6.6.
INITIAL STUDY REPORT STUDY OF FISH PASSAGE BARRIERS IN THE
MIDDLE AND UPPER SUSITNA RIVER AND SUSITNA TRIBUTARIES (9.12)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Part A - Page 4 June 2014
4. METHODS
Study methods varied primarily depending on the type of barrier being assessed. In this study,
depth barriers were more of a concern in sloughs, side channels, and mouths of tributaries.
Geologic barriers (cascades and waterfalls) were more of a concern within tributaries. Beaver
dam barriers occurred in sloughs, side channels, and tributaries. While the specific methods for
each barrier type differed, the general study components and steps were similar for locating and
assessing the various types of barriers.
Methods for the study of fish passage barriers consisted of the following study components:
• Identify fish species to be included in the passage barrier study.
• Define the passage criteria for the identified fish species.
• Select specific study sites and representative study sites.
• Conduct field studies.
• Coordinate with other interdependent studies and identify modeling needs and outputs
from the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study (Study 8.5), the Fluvial Geomorphology
Modeling below Watana Dam Study (Study 6.6), and the Ice Processes in the Susitna
River Study (Study 7.6) as described in Section 4.5.
• Evaluate potential effects of altered fluvial processes on fish passage in sloughs, upland
sloughs, side channels, and at tributary mouths in the Middle River and in tributaries
entering the reservoir zone in the Upper River
4.1. Fish Species Identification
AEA implemented the methods for species identification as described in the Study Plan with the
exception of the variance explained in Section 4.1.1. The fish community of the Susitna River
includes approximately 19 documented fish species. Within this community, some fish species
exhibit life history patterns that rely on multiple habitats during freshwater rearing and are thus
more sensitive to changes in access to side channels, sloughs, and/or tributary habitats (Table
4.1-1). A subset of species was selected for the fish passage barrier analysis based on passage
sensitivity, species distribution, and the locations of potential barriers. Given the
interdependencies between the barriers assessment and Instream Flow Study physical habitat
data collection, AEA proposed that target species for the fish barrier studies be the same or a
subset of those selected for the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study (ISR Study 8.5; Table
4.1-2). For planning purposes, high priority target species proposed in the Fish and Aquatics
Instream Flow Study included Chinook, coho, chum, pink and sockeye salmon, rainbow trout,
and Arctic grayling. These target species were selected because they are generally considered
the most sensitive to habitat loss through manipulation of flows in the Susitna River. All of these
species aside from pink salmon have also been identified as target species for the Study of Fish
Passage Feasibility at Watana Dam (ISR Study 9.11, Table 4.1-2). Fish passage target species
selection was first based on presence of the species in the Upper River, secondly on the
following three criteria, and thirdly in consultation with the Fish Passage Technical Team at their
INITIAL STUDY REPORT STUDY OF FISH PASSAGE BARRIERS IN THE
MIDDLE AND UPPER SUSITNA RIVER AND SUSITNA TRIBUTARIES (9.12)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Part A - Page 5 June 2014
workshop on April 9 and 10, 2013. Aspects of these criteria used by the Fish Passage study team
are also useful for selecting target species for passage barrier studies:
• The species exhibits migratory behavior – Fish passage has a greater importance to
species that may exhibit migratory behavior as part of their natural life history compared
to fish that exhibit only localized movement, especially when the migration is necessary
to complete the life cycle of the species.
• The species has high relative abundance – Species that are relatively abundant in the
Upper River and its tributaries would theoretically utilize fish passage facilities with
greater frequency than less abundant species, disregarding other criteria (e.g., migratory
behavior).
• The species is important to commercial, sport, or subsistence fisheries – Species that are
harvested in commercial, sport, or subsistence fisheries.
AEA will seek input from the Instream Flow Technical Work Group when finalizing target
species and life stages. Information to be discussed during a Technical Team meeting in Q1 of
2013, team members, licensing participants, and AEA will include species and lifestage use of
off-channel habitats, seasonal movement into and out of off-channel habitats, and microhabitat
(depth and velocity). This information will be used to refine the target species selection.
4.1.1. Variances
The Implementation Plan provided that Fish Species Identification would occur in the third
quarter of 2013 (IP Section 7.1.5). Instead, fish species consultation will occur in the next year
of the study to coincide with the consultation for Fish Passage Criteria (see Section 4.2). Since
decision-making for fish species and fish passage criteria are linked, simultaneous consultation
with licensing participants will avoid redundancy. Any changes to the species list will be
included in the analysis of fish barriers in the Updated Study Report.
4.2. Passage Criteria for the Identified Fish Species
AEA implemented the methods as described in the Study Plan. Passage criteria are being refined
in accordance with approved study methods as outlined in the Implementation Plan (Section
7.1.5). Salmonid passage criteria are well researched and some criteria exist for all species,
while passage criteria for many non-salmonids have not been researched and therefore criteria do
not currently exist. Which criteria are used and whether “surrogate” salmonid species criteria
can be substituted for other species will be determined in consultation with licensing participants
in the Fish and Aquatic TWG and Technical Team meetings in the next year of the study.
Basic categories of fish passage criteria for use in this study include water depth, water velocity,
and fish leaping ability. Depth criteria will be used to assess access into, within, and out of side
channels, sloughs, and tributaries.
Leaping criteria will be reestablished for the vertical and horizontal distances fish must leap to
pass a physical barrier. The velocity component of passage at a physical or depth barrier will be
applied where velocity influences successful passage. Velocity criteria will also be applied at
chutes. Leaping criteria and velocity criteria will be applied only in tributaries (including their
mouths) and at beaver dams.
INITIAL STUDY REPORT STUDY OF FISH PASSAGE BARRIERS IN THE
MIDDLE AND UPPER SUSITNA RIVER AND SUSITNA TRIBUTARIES (9.12)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Part A - Page 6 June 2014
4.2.1. Depth Criteria for Adult Upstream Migration
Existing depth criteria for evaluating fish passage include the transect criteria (Thompson 1972)
and the depth/distance criteria (ADF&G 1984a). The resulting ADF&G (1984a) chum salmon
passage criteria curves for small substrate and uniform, unobstructed channel are presented in
Figure 4.2-1. Chum salmon passage curves for large substrate and non-uniform obstructed
channel are presented in Figure 4.2-2. Depth, length, and substrate criteria were modified for
chum and developed for other species as a part of this study with input from licensing
participants.
4.2.2. Leaping Criteria for Adult Upstream Migration
The ability of a fish to pass a vertical barrier is determined by species- and life stage-specific
endogenous factors such as burst speed, swimming form, and leaping capability. Exogenous
factors include water depth, stream flow, and barrier geometry. Powers and Orsborn (1985)
present a detailed analysis of passage at physical barriers to upstream migration by salmon and
trout. Powers and Orsborn (1985) present criteria for Chinook, coho, sockeye, pink, and chum
salmon passage at waterfalls and cascades. Other sources of leaping height criteria are available
from Reiser and Peacock (1985) and the USFS (2001). Table 4.2-1 presents the leaping criteria
from the three sources.
Leaping curves and jumping equations assume that the depth of the pool the fish must leap from
is adequate. In this study, leaping criteria will be refined in consultation with licensing
participants during the TWG and Technical Team meetings in the next year of the study.
4.2.3. Upstream Velocity Criteria
Juvenile salmonid swim speeds have been well researched so there are abundant existing criteria.
Swim speed criteria for non-salmonid juveniles have not been well researched and existing
criteria are not generally available. Velocity criteria will be determined with input from
licensing participants during TWG and Technical Team meetings in the next year of the study in
instances where velocity criteria do not exist for species of interest.
4.2.4. Downstream Passage Criteria
The species, life stage, and respective depth criteria for passage of downstream migrating fish
will be determined in collaboration with licensing participants during TWG and Technical Team
meetings in the next year of study.
4.3. Site Selection
AEA implemented the methods as described in the Study Plan with the exception of the variance
explained in Section 4.3.5. Components of study site selection are outlined below.
4.3.1. Upper River Tributaries
Selection of tributaries and tributary mouths for study in 2013 expanded on the 2012 Upper
Susitna River Fish Distribution and Habitat Study (HDR Alaska, Inc. 2013). Forty-one
INITIAL STUDY REPORT STUDY OF FISH PASSAGE BARRIERS IN THE
MIDDLE AND UPPER SUSITNA RIVER AND SUSITNA TRIBUTARIES (9.12)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Part A - Page 7 June 2014
tributaries were selected from the Upper River within the area from the proposed dam site
upstream to the Oshetna River and were surveyed for adult salmon passage barriers in 2012
(HDR Alaska, Inc. 2013). Twelve potential barriers were identified, and eight were confirmed as
permanent barriers to upstream fish passage (falls and cascades ranged from 11-50 ft) during
2012 surveys (Table 4.3-1). A follow-up of five remaining potential barriers within the
inundation zone were conducted by aerial and foot surveys in September 2013 (Figure 4.3-1a).
4.3.2. Middle River Tributaries within and above Devil’s Canyon
In 2012, 38 tributaries (study sites) were selected and surveyed for adult salmon passage barriers
from PRM 150 to 185, including tributaries draining into Devils Canyon and the uppermost
tributary just downstream of the proposed dam site (HDR Alaska, Inc. 2013). Each selected
tributary was surveyed for potential barriers up to the first confirmed barrier or to the 3,000-ft
elevation, the highest elevation at which salmon had been observed during prior investigations
(HDR Alaska, Inc. 2013). Thirty-one potential barriers were identified, and 27 were confirmed
as permanent barriers to upstream fish passage during 2012 surveys (Table 4.3-2).
In 2013, Middle River tributary mouths and mouths outside Focus Areas were surveyed for fish
barriers (Table 4.3-3). Seven tributaries were surveyed in September 2013, including Gold
Creek, Fourth of July Creek, Sherman Creek, Fifth of July Creek, Deadhorse Creek, Lane Creek,
and Chase Creek (Figure 4.3-1b). The Geomorphology Study conducted intensive study of
seven additional tributary mouths (Figure 4.3-1b).
4.3.3. Middle River below Devil’s Canyon
In the Middle River, the expanse, large number, and complexity of sloughs and side channels
prohibits total coverage of all such potentially affected areas. Thus, sub-sampling of these
habitats was necessary. Based on the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study’s 2-D model
results (ISR Study 6.6) and the Fish and Aquatic Instream Flow Study’s fish observations (ISR
Study 8.5), a subset of tributary mouths, sloughs, and side channels will be identified in the next
year of the study in accordance with approved study methods.
4.3.4. Lower River
Investigation and evaluation of fish passage barriers in the Lower River will follow a phased
approach in which studies of barriers in the Middle River will be used to determine the need and
design for barrier studies in the Lower River (FERC 2013). Other studies to be conducted in
2013 that will contribute to determining the need for barrier studies in the Lower River are Fish
Distribution and Abundance in the Middle and Lower Rivers (Study 9.6); Fish and Aquatics
Instream Flow Study (Study 8.5); Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study (Study 6.6); and the
Open-water Flow Routing Model (Study 8.5). If 2013 results, as presented in the Initial Study
Report, indicate that the Project will cause significant adverse effects on fish passage into
tributaries and off-channel habitats in the Middle River, then additional study sites will be added
in the Lower River in the next year of study (FERC 2013).
INITIAL STUDY REPORT STUDY OF FISH PASSAGE BARRIERS IN THE
MIDDLE AND UPPER SUSITNA RIVER AND SUSITNA TRIBUTARIES (9.12)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Part A - Page 8 June 2014
4.3.5. Modeling Sites
As recommended by FERC in HDR Inc.2013, AEA is locating fish passage barrier intensive
sampling sites for both the ice-free and ice-cover periods within the selected Focus Areas. Data
collection during ice-free conditions occurred in nine of 10 Focus Areas and included a total of
34 side channels, 8 side sloughs (one with a beaver pond), 13 upland sloughs (one with a beaver
pond), 2 macrohabitat backwaters, and 10 tributary mouths (Table 4.3-4). Ice-cover modeling
will take place in a subset of Focus Areas, including FA-104, FA-113, FA-115, and FA-128 in
accordance with approved study methods.
AEA does not propose any data collection or hydrodynamic modeling under this Study. All data
collection and hydrodynamic modeling is being conducted as described in the ISRs for the
Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study (ISR Study 6.6), the Ice Processes in the Susitna River
Dam Study (ISR Study 7.6), the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study (ISR Study 8.5), and the
Riparian Instream Flow Study (ISR Study 8.6).
4.3.6. Variances
The 2012 Upper Susitna River Fish Distribution and Habitat Study, Study Component 1 of 4,
Fish Passage Barriers Assessment technical memorandum identified eight features as potential
fish passage barriers in the Middle and Upper River to be targeted for evaluation in 2013 (HDR
Alaska, Inc. 2013). However, AEA was not granted access to Cook Inlet Regional Working
Group (CIRWG) lands in 2013, which prevented ground access to eight potential barriers within
seven streams (Cheechako Creek, Tributary 158.7, Devil Creek, Tributary 169.1, Tributary
189.7, Tributary 197.7, and Tributary 204.5). Nevertheless, the four barriers within the
inundation zone of the proposed reservoir in Cheechako Creek, Tributary 158.7, Devil Creek,
and Tributary 169.1 were targeted for aerial evaluation to estimate barrier heights using laser
rangefinders. The four remaining potential barriers in the middle river will be surveyed in the
next year of the study, allowing AEA to meet Objective 1.
Section 7.4.1 of the Implementation Plan summarized the 27 Middle River tributary mouths
selected for fish passage barrier investigation. Three tributary mouths within the ARRC right-of-
way (ROW) (McKenzie, Lower McKenzie and Little Portage) and nine tributary mouths
between Jack Long Creek and Tsusena Creek located within CIRWG lands were not surveyed in
2013. Ground surveys will be conducted at all 12 remaining targeted sites in the next year of the
study.
4.4. Field Methods
AEA implemented the methods as described in the Study Plan with the exception of the variance
explained in Section 4.4.5.
Studies in the Middle River relied on data collected as part of this study as well as efforts by the
Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study (ISR Study 6.6) and the Aquatic Furbearer Abundance
and Habitat Use Study (ISR Study 10.11).
INITIAL STUDY REPORT STUDY OF FISH PASSAGE BARRIERS IN THE
MIDDLE AND UPPER SUSITNA RIVER AND SUSITNA TRIBUTARIES (9.12)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Part A - Page 9 June 2014
4.4.1. Geologic Barriers to Fish Passage
Geologic barriers were assessed by following the methods of Powers and Orsborn (1984).
Barriers were located by first reviewing existing information including:
• Topographic maps
• Current high-resolution aerial imagery including aerial imagery and LiDAR from the
Geomorphic Mapping Study and the 2011 Matanuska-Susitna LiDAR and Imagery
Project
• Low elevation aerial video imagery
• Results of the 2012 Upper River Fish Distribution Study
• Results of the Open-water Flow Routing Model Study coupled with the projected effects
of proposed Project operations on the zone of hydraulic influence
• Other relevant and available sources
Aerial surveys or a ground survey team examined tributaries or stream reaches where barriers
were present or where their presence could not be ruled out by existing information. During
ground surveys, tributary barriers were assessed in two phases. If a stream feature was a possible
obstacle to the species of concern, the geometry of the obstacle was surveyed including
measurements of barrier height, leap distance, and estimated depth of leaping pool at high and
low flow. Barriers were drawn to scale, photographed, and their location fixed with GPS. If the
obstacle was clearly not a barrier, its location and basic dimensions were noted with no further
measurements.
For aerial surveys, the vertical height and horizontal length of each barrier was measured using a
Laser Tech Tru Pulse 200 laser rangefinder. The accuracy of the range-finder method was tested
prior to the aerial surveys by sighting the range finder to an 8-ft stadia rod. The estimated height
from 70 m (230 ft) was consistently within 1 ft. Therefore, aerial estimates of barrier height are
± 1 ft. Ten measurement pairs (top and bottom of barrier) were taken in order to estimate a mean
height and length. Site photos were taken by helicopter to supplement the measurements, provide
documentation of adjacent reaches, and for follow-up assessment.
If the ground surveyors were uncertain regarding the proposed barrier status of an obstacle, a
decision tree analysis (URS and HDR 2010) was implemented that was consistent with Powers
and Orsborn (1985) and modified as necessary for site-specific species and barrier conditions.
The barrier analysis decision tree is a step-wise process for evaluating potential barriers in the
field. Quantitative metrics were used at each step in the decision tree to identify the
impassability of the potential barrier.
4.4.2. Beaver Dams
Aerial surveys of active beaver colonies were conducted by helicopter by the Aquatic Furbearers
Study (Study 10.11) between October 1 and 10 in 2013 in accordance with the Barriers
Implementation Plan. The Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study (ISR Study 6.6) ground-
verified 18 beaver dams in Focus Areas (Table 4.1-1). Photographs were taken and dam heights
were estimated.
INITIAL STUDY REPORT STUDY OF FISH PASSAGE BARRIERS IN THE
MIDDLE AND UPPER SUSITNA RIVER AND SUSITNA TRIBUTARIES (9.12)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Part A - Page 10 June 2014
4.4.3. Tributary Mouths
4.4.3.1. Depth
While the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study (ISR Study 6.6) collected bathymetric,
substrate, and flow data to support depth barrier analysis within Focus Areas, tributaries outside
Focus Areas required additional surveys in 2013. A thalweg profile for seven tributaries outside
Focus Areas was surveyed from the confluence of the Susitna River to the top of the ZHI during
low flow conditions in late September 2013 (Appendix B). Cross-sections were surveyed at
thalweg breakpoints and tributary discharge was measured. Substrate along the thalweg and
uniformity of channel were recorded. Mainstem water surface elevation was measured and
photographed.
4.4.3.2. Velocity
Velocity barriers over tributary mouths were assessed at the same time and used some of the
same methods as described in Section 4.4.3.1 for depth barriers. Field surveys began with
Susitna flows just above 16,000 cfs on September 18 (at the USGS Gold Creek gage) and
concluded with flows below 12,000 cfs on September 27, 2013. Velocity profiles were obtained
across the steepest sections of the reach that was within the ZHI. Velocities were measured as
the main channel flow receded to capture the highest velocity within the ZHI without backwater
influence from the main channel. All measurements were taken during the migratory timing of
target species into the tributaries.
Longitudinal profiles were collected, along with velocity measurements and stream substrate
assessments, at each thalweg survey point. Cross-sections were taken to characterize the
geometry of the tributary mouth and upstream channels within the 33,500-cfs ZHI. Additional
survey points were collected at each site to better define the tributary mouth area, both dry and
wet portions, as well as geometry extending into the Susitna River. Control points and
temporary benchmarks were established for follow-on survey work, and to tie into existing
Project survey. A flow measurement of the tributary was taken at each site to aid in correlation
of velocity, depth, and relative flow condition between the Susitna and the tributary itself.
All survey points were electronically collected using a Leica RTK FM rover and base station.
This equipment allowed for precise collection of elevation, latitude, and longitude of each survey
point, as well as adding a point-specific descriptor, such as thalweg, toe of slope, or water
surface elevation. One or more check points (CP) and a temporary benchmark (TBM) were
established in the vicinity of each site to document the survey, to provide follow-on reference
points for use with a total station or theodolite, and to provide a relatively stable monument to tie
into other Project survey data.
4.4.4. Data Analysis
Fish passage is a mechanistic analysis that compares the physical capabilities and periodicity of a
fish species or life stage with the environmental variables of the barrier. Each barrier will be
analyzed on a case-by-case basis in accordance with approved study methods.
INITIAL STUDY REPORT STUDY OF FISH PASSAGE BARRIERS IN THE
MIDDLE AND UPPER SUSITNA RIVER AND SUSITNA TRIBUTARIES (9.12)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Part A - Page 11 June 2014
4.4.5. Variances
Section 7.3.2 of the Implementation Plan provided that in addition to photographs and GPS
waypoints, the following metrics would be collected during ground surveys of beaver dams: dam
height, length, and breadth; the depth of the leaping pool; and observations of possible
passageways through or around the dam. However, in 2013, only beaver dam heights and
activity status were recorded for ground-surveyed beaver dams. The 2013 surveys will not
enable conclusive barrier identification, but will support modeling that will allow barrier
evaluation in the next year of the study.
4.5. Modeling Methods
AEA implemented the methods as described in the Study Plan with the no variances. AEA is
coordinating with modeling studies—Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling, Study 6.6, and Open-
water Flow Routing Model, Study 8.5—to implement the modeling methods as described in the
Study Plan. AEA coordinated with hydrology and geomorphology modelers to understand how
flow and sediment dynamics will be simulated to estimate current and future barrier conditions
for fish passage. Modeling methods are applied in Focus Areas to assess depth and velocity
barriers in sloughs, side channels, and mouths of tributaries. Interpretations of model results in
proof-of-concept model runs for 1-D and 2-D flow and geomorphic models are to be completed
in the next year of the study (Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling, ISR Study 6.6).
4.5.1. Modeling Methods for Ice-free Periods
4.5.1.1. Upper River Tributary Mouths
The Geomorphology Study is estimating the formation of mouths in selected tributaries entering
the reservoir zone (Study 6.5, RSP Section 6.5.4.8.2.2). The impact of these mouths on fish
movement into and out of the reservoir will be evaluated using fish passage criteria in
accordance with approved study methods.
4.5.1.2. Middle River Focus Areas
AEA’s fish barrier assessment in Focus Areas is dependent on models developed as part of the
ongoing Geomorphology, Instream Flow, and Ice Processes studies. The specific 2-D models
are currently being tested by proof-of-concept model runs in FA-104 using either SRH-D, a
finite-volume hydrodynamic model, or River2D, a depth-averaged finite-element hydrodynamic
model (see ISR Study 6.6). The final decision on model selection depends on the ability of the
model to produce representative flow and sediment transport results for existing conditions
(Tetra Tech 2013).
The 2-D model, coupled with the flow routing model and the groundwater model, is being
assessed to evaluate passage conditions over the full range of pre- and post-Project flow
conditions. To the extent possible, passage criteria will be input to the 2-D habitat model,
yielding an integrated analysis tool.
INITIAL STUDY REPORT STUDY OF FISH PASSAGE BARRIERS IN THE
MIDDLE AND UPPER SUSITNA RIVER AND SUSITNA TRIBUTARIES (9.12)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Part A - Page 12 June 2014
4.5.2. Modeling Methods for Ice-cover Periods
AEA is relying on data collected by the intensive, multidisciplinary studies in Focus Areas to
evaluate the effects of load-following on juvenile and fry passage at off-channel habitats during
the ice-cover period in accordance with approved study methods. AEA does not propose any
hydrodynamic or ice modeling under Study 9.12 for this study element. All hydrodynamic or ice
modeling will be conducted as described in other ISRs.
4.5.3. Variances
There are no variances to the study plan for Modeling Methods for Ice-free Periods.
5. RESULTS
Results of 2013 field efforts include thalweg surveys of mouths at seven major tributaries in the
Middle River, and aerial surveys of five geologic barriers in the Upper River tributaries. AEA
has also compiled beaver dam surveys conducted by other studies. Detailed field results are
presented in Appendices B and C. Data developed in support of the ISR is available for
download at http://gis.suhydro.org/reports/isr (ISR_9_12_BARR_BarrierData).
5.1. Geologic Barriers
Five potential geologic barriers on four streams were surveyed for upstream fish passage in 2013
(Appendix A). Three potential barriers in three unnamed Upper River tributaries (Unnamed
Tributary 189.7, Unnamed Tributary 197.7, and Unnamed Tributary 215.2) were classified as
permanent fixed barriers because heights were well above the threshold for adult salmon leaping
(11 ft) and slopes ranged from 10 to 83 percent. Two additional barriers on Unnamed Tributary
204.5 were classified as potential barriers because heights were between 7.7 and 10.8 feet;
however, these barriers also had shallow plunge pools or resting areas that would make adult
salmon passage difficult.
5.2. Beaver Dams
In 2013, aerial surveys of the mainstem Susitna River and its tributaries identified 156 beaver
colonies, of which 125 were associated with dams (ISR Study 10.11). All 17 beaver dams in the
upper River were located in Deadman Creek basin. There were 28 in Middle River tributaries
above and within Devils Canyon and 38 in tributaries below. Forty-two were located in the
mainstem Middle River. In addition, ground surveys in Middle River Focus Areas 104, 113,
115, 128, 138, 141, and 144 identified 18 beaver dams that ranged in height from 1.5 to 5.5 ft.
(ISR Study 6.5). As would be expected some of the Middle River mainstem beaver dams
identified by ground and aerial surveys were the same (Figure 5.2-1). Preliminary review of the
GIS indicates that 2013 ground surveys identified 8 additional beaver dams that were not
documented in the aerial survey for a total count of 50 beaver dams documented in Middle River
mainstem in 2013.
INITIAL STUDY REPORT STUDY OF FISH PASSAGE BARRIERS IN THE
MIDDLE AND UPPER SUSITNA RIVER AND SUSITNA TRIBUTARIES (9.12)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Part A - Page 13 June 2014
5.3. Tributary Mouths
Seven tributary mouths (Gold Creek, Fourth of July Creek, Sherman Creek, Fifth of July Creek,
Deadhorse Creek, Lane Creek, and Chase Creek) were surveyed that showed contrasting
substrates, channel morphology, water velocities, and thalweg profiles from tributary channels,
through the debris apron and into the Susitna channel (Appendix B). The degree to which these
tributary mouths are conducive to fish passage will be presented in the Updated Study Report.
6. DISCUSSION
To date, the Study of Fish Passage Barriers in the Middle and Upper Susitna River and Susitna
Tributaries has identified a list of potential target fish species to be evaluated with input from the
licensing participants. Similarly, a preliminary set of passage criteria for velocity, leaping, and
depth criteria has been proposed and a final set of criteria will be selected with input from
licensing participants. In 2012 and 2013, AEA completed aerial surveys for geologic barriers in
all major tributaries in the Upper and Middle River. Within the ZHI in the Middle River, AEA
characterized potential depth and velocity barriers in all accessible tributary mouths. All existing
fish barriers not on CIRWG or ARRC lands have been located. Characterization of existing
barriers and evaluation of potential changes to barriers under Project conditions is ongoing and
coordinated with the Geomorphology Study (Study 6.5), the Ice Processes Study (Study 7.6), and
the Flow Routing Study (Study 8.5.4). The Salmon Escapement Study is evaluating the
upstream passage of adult salmon through Devils Canyon (Study 9.7).
Impacts of changes to barriers will be evaluated in coordination with results from the Fish and
Aquatic Instream Flow Study (Study 8.5), the Upper and Middle River Fish Distribution and
Abundance Studies (Studies 9.5 and 9.6), and the Habitat Characterization and Mapping Study
(Study 9.9).
Field efforts and results reported for 2012 and 2013, in combination with those planned for the
next year of the study, are on track to evaluate the potential effects of Project-induced changes in
flow and geomorphology on free access of fish into, within, and out of suitable habitats in the
Upper River and the Middle River. Model outputs from the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling
Study (Study 6.6) and Ice Processes (Study 7.6) will be critical to meet the proposed schedule for
evaluation of current and future barriers to fish passage.
7. COMPLETING THE STUDY
[Section 7 appears in the Part C section of this ISR.]
INITIAL STUDY REPORT STUDY OF FISH PASSAGE BARRIERS IN THE
MIDDLE AND UPPER SUSITNA RIVER AND SUSITNA TRIBUTARIES (9.12)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Part A - Page 14 June 2014
8. LITERATURE CITED
ADF&G (Alaska Department of Fish & Game). 1984a. Susitna Hydro Aquatic Studies, Report
No.3: Aquatic habitat and instream flow investigations, May–October 1983 (Review
Draft). Chapter 6: An evaluation of passage conditions for adult salmon in sloughs and
side channels of the Middle Susitna River. Prepared for Alaska Power Authority,
Anchorage, AK.
ADF&G 1984b. Susitna Hydro Aquatic Studies, Report No.3: Aquatic habitat and instream flow
investigations, May–October 1983. Chapter 2: Channel geometry investigations of the
Susitna River Basin. Prepared for Alaska Power Authority, Anchorage, AK.
AEA (Alaska Energy Authority). December 2012. Revised Study Plan: Susitna-Watana
Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 14241. Prepared for the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission by the Alaska Energy Authority, Anchorage. Published online
at: http://www.susitna-watanahydro.org/study-plan.
FERC 2013. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). Office of Energy Projects. April
1, 2013. Study Plan Determination for the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project No.
14241-000.
HDR. 2013. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC No. 14241. June 2013. Study of Fish
Passage Barriers Implementation Plan. Fish Passage Barriers Assessment. Prepared for
the Alaska Energy Authority, Anchorage, Alaska.
HDR Alaska, Inc. 2013. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC No. 14241. February 2013.
2012 Upper Susitna River Fish Distribution and Habitat Study. Study Component 1 of 4.
Fish Passage Barriers Assessment. Prepared for the Alaska Energy Authority, Anchorage,
Alaska.
Powers, P. D., and J. F. Orsborn. 1985. New Concepts in Fish Ladder Design: Analysis of
Barriers to Upstream Fish Migration, Volume IV of IV; Investigation of the Physical and
Biological Conditions Affecting Fish Passage Success at Culverts and Waterfalls", 1982-
1984 Final Report, Project No. 198201400, 134 electronic pages, (BPA Report DOE/BP-
36523-1)
Reiser, D. W. and R. Peacock. 1985. A technique for assessing upstream fish passage problems
at small-scale hydropower developments. Pages 423–432 in F. Olson, R. White, and R.
Hamre, editors. Proceedings of the symposium on small hydropower and fisheries.
American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, Maryland.
Tetra Tech 2013. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC No. 14241. June 2013. Fluvial
Geomorphology Modeling Approach Technical Memorandum. Prepared for the Alaska
Energy Authority, Anchorage, Alaska
Thompson, K. 1972. Determining stream flows for fish life. Presentation at the Pacific
Northwest River Basin Commission Instream Flow Requirements Workshop, March 15–
16, 1972.
INITIAL STUDY REPORT STUDY OF FISH PASSAGE BARRIERS IN THE
MIDDLE AND UPPER SUSITNA RIVER AND SUSITNA TRIBUTARIES (9.12)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Part A - Page 15 June 2014
URS and HDR. 2010. Assessment of fish migration at natural barriers in the upper Alameda
Creek sub-watershed. A technical memorandum prepared for San Francisco Public
Utilities Commission.
USFS (U.S. Forest Service). 2001. Aquatic habitat management handbook. U.S. Forest Service,
R-10 FSH 2090.21. Juneau, Alaska.
INITIAL STUDY REPORT STUDY OF FISH PASSAGE BARRIERS IN THE
MIDDLE AND UPPER SUSITNA RIVER AND SUSITNA TRIBUTARIES (9.12)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Part A - Page 16 June 2014
9. TABLES
Table 4.1- 1. HSC curve development priority and fish passage (ISR Study 9.11) priority species list.
Common Name HSC Low HSC Moderate HSC High PASS
Chinook salmon X X
Chum salmon X X
Coho salmon X X
Pink salmon X Sockeye salmon X X
Arctic grayling X X
Bering cisco X X
Burbot X X
Dolly Varden X X X
Eulachon X Lamprey, arctic X X
Longnose sucker X X
Northern pike X Sculpin X Stickleback, threespine X Trout, lake X Trout, rainbow X X
Whitefish, humpback X X X
Whitefish, round X X X
INITIAL STUDY REPORT STUDY OF FISH PASSAGE BARRIERS IN THE
MIDDLE AND UPPER SUSITNA RIVER AND SUSITNA TRIBUTARIES (9.12)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Part A - Page 17 June 2014
Table 4.2- 1. Pacific salmon leaping height capabilities from three sources.
Species Leaping Height (in feet)
Powers and Orsborn (1985)1 Reiser and Peacock (1985) USFS (2001)
Chinook 7.5 7.9 11.0
Chum 3.5 4.0 4.0
Coho 7.5 7.3 11.0
Pink 3.5 4.0 4.0
Sockeye 7.5 6.9 10.0
Note:
1 Assumes a trajectory of 800 with a condition factor of 1.0. Maximum leaping height is less at a lower
trajectory and lower fish condition factor.
INITIAL STUDY REPORT STUDY OF FISH PASSAGE BARRIERS IN THE
MIDDLE AND UPPER SUSITNA RIVER AND SUSITNA TRIBUTARIES (9.12)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Part A - Page 18 June 2014
Table 4.3- 1. Potential geologic barriers evaluated in the Upper Susitna River in 2013 and in 2012 as reported in HDR Alaska, Inc. 2013
2012
Barrier ID
Tributary
PRM
Tributary
Name
Survey
Year
Location
(tributary RM) Category Barrier*/Potential
Barrier Present Class Description
PB186.6-A 189.4 Deadman
Creek 2012 0.6 Permanent Barrier Single Falls Permanent anadromous barrier with falls > 50 ft
PB186.9-A 189.7 Unnamed
Tributary 189.7 2013 0.4 Permanent Barrier Complex
Chute
Permanent barrier due to high gradient cascades,
and bedrock chutes >29ft
PB194.9-A 197.7 Unnamed
Tributary 197.7 2013 1.3 Permanent Barrier Multiple
Falls
Permanent barrier due to steep gradient boulder
cascades and falls > 13ft
PB200.7-A 203.4 Unnamed
Tributary 203.4 2012 0.2 Permanent Barrier Single Falls Permanent anadromous barriers with single falls
estimated at 10–12 ft
PB200.7-B 203.4 Unnamed
Tributary 203.4 2012 0.2 Permanent Barrier Single Falls Permanent anadromous barriers with single falls
estimated at 40–50 ft
PB200.7-C 203.4 Unnamed
Tributary 203.4 2012 0.2 Permanent Barrier Single Falls Permanent anadromous barriers with single falls
estimated at 15–20 ft
PB200.7-D 203.4 Unnamed
Tributary 203.4 2012 0.2 Permanent Barrier Single Falls Permanent anadromous barriers with single falls
estimated at 11–12 ft
PB200.7-E 203.4 Unnamed
Tributary 203.4 2012 0.2 Permanent Barrier Single Falls Permanent anadromous barriers with single falls
estimated at 20 ft
PB201.8-A 204.5 Unnamed
Tributary 204.5 2013 0.4 Permanent Potential Compound Potential barrier due to steep gradient boulder
cascades and falls > 7ft
PB201.8-B 204.5 Unnamed
Tributary 204.5 2013 0.6 Permanent Potential Compound Potential barriers due to steep gradient boulder
cascades and falls > 10ft
PB213.0-A 215.2 Unnamed
Tributary 215.2 2013 0.6 Permanent Barrier Compound Potential barrier due to steep gradient boulder
cascades and falls > 60ft
Upper Extent Proposed Watana Reservoir at Low Pool (1850 ft NAVD88, PRM 222.5
PB226.8-A 228.5 Unnamed
Tributary 228.5 2012 0.7 Permanent Barrier Single Falls Permanent anadromous barrier with falls > 60 ft
Upper Extent Proposed Watana Reservoir at Full Pool (2050 ft NAVD88, PRM 232.5
*Preliminary barrier category based on decision tree using proposed leaping criteria for Chinook salmon (10 ft).
INITIAL STUDY REPORT STUDY OF FISH PASSAGE BARRIERS IN THE
MIDDLE AND UPPER SUSITNA RIVER AND SUSITNA TRIBUTARIES (9.12)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Part A - Page 19 June 2014
Table 4.3- 2 Potential geologic barriers evaluated in the Middle Susitna River in 2013 and in 2012 as reported in HDR Alaska, Inc. 2013.
2012 Barrier ID Tributary PRM Tributary Name Survey Year Location (tributary RM) Category Barrier*/ Potential Barrier Class Description
Middle River Downstream of Devils Canyon
PB150.1-A 153.7 Unnamed
Tributary 153.7 2012 0.1 Permanent Barrier Compound Permanent anadromous barrier with falls > 10 ft.
Cascades and chutes upstream and downstream
PB150.2-A 153.8 Unnamed
Tributary 153.8 2012 0.2 Permanent Barrier Complex Chute Permanent anadromous barrier due to low flow, high
gradient and complex chutes
Middle River Within Devils Canyon
PB151.0-A 154.6 Unnamed
Tributary 154.6 2012 0.1 Permanent Barrier Complex Chute Permanent anadromous barrier due to low flow, high
gradient and complex chutes
PB152.0-A 155.4 Unnamed
Tributary 155.4 2012 0.5 Permanent Barrier Compound Permanent anadromous barrier with falls > 10 ft, low
flow, high gradient, cascades, and complex chutes
PB152.4-A 155.9 Cheechako
Creek 2012 2.1 Permanent Potential Compound
Potential seasonal barrier due to high gradient boulder
cascades falls 3-4 ft, chutes, and high velocity
turbulence
PB152.4-B 155.9 Cheechako
Creek 2012 2.1 Permanent Barrier Multiple Falls Permanent anadromous barriers (2) with falls > 10 ft
and shallow plunge pool
PB152.4-C 155.9 Cheechako
Creek 2012 2.1 Permanent Barrier Single Falls Permanent anadromous barrier with waterfall much
>10 ft
PB153.4-A 156.8 Unnamed
Tributary 156.8 2012 0.3 Permanent Barrier Single Falls Permanent anadromous barrier with falls > 30 ft
PB154.5-A 157.9 Unnamed
Tributary 157.9 2012 0.1 Permanent Barrier Multiple Falls Permanent anadromous barrier with high velocity falls
> 10 ft
PB154.6-A 158.3 Unnamed
Tributary 158.3 2012 0.1 Permanent Barrier Complex Chute Permanent anadromous barrier with high velocity
bedrock chutes
PB155.3-A 158.7 Unnamed
Tributary 158.7 2012 0.1 Permanent Barrier Compound Permanent anadromous barrier with falls > 10 ft
PB155.3-B 158.7 Unnamed
Tributary 158.7 2012 0.1 Permanent Barrier Single Falls Permanent anadromous barrier with falls 12–15 ft
PB155.3-C 158.7 Unnamed
Tributary 158.7 2012 0.1 Permanent Potential Boulder
Cascade
Continuous boulder/cascade complex with limited
resting areas
INITIAL STUDY REPORT STUDY OF FISH PASSAGE BARRIERS IN THE
MIDDLE AND UPPER SUSITNA RIVER AND SUSITNA TRIBUTARIES (9.12)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Part A - Page 20 June 2014
2012 Barrier ID Tributary PRM Tributary Name Survey Year Location (tributary RM) Category Barrier*/ Potential Barrier Class Description
PB157.0-A 160.5 Chinook Creek 2012 1.3 Permanent Barrier Single Falls Permanent anadromous barrier with falls > 10 ft
PB158.8-A 162.6 Unnamed
Tributary 162.6 2012 0.1 Permanent Barrier Compound Permanent anadromous barrier with falls > 30 ft
Middle River Upstream of Devils Canyon Impediment 3
PB161.5-A 164.8 Devil Creek 2012 1.4 Permanent Barrier Single Falls Permanent anadromous barrier with falls estimated at
80–100 ft
PB161.5-B 164.8 Devil Creek 2012 1.4 Permanent Barrier Single Falls Permanent anadromous barrier with falls estimated at
40 ft
PB161.5-C 164.8 Devil Creek 2012 1.4 Permanent Potential Compound Chutes and falls with continuous whitewater
PB165.0-A 168.1 Unnamed
Tributary 168.1 2012 0.1 Permanent Barrier Single Falls Permanent anadromous barrier with falls > 10 ft
PB165.2-A 168.3 Unnamed
Tributary 168.3 2012 0.2 Permanent Barrier Single Falls Permanent anadromous barrier with falls > 10–12 ft
PB165.6-A 169.1 Unnamed
Tributary 169.1 2012 1.3 Permanent Potential Compound
Potential barrier due to steep gradient boulder
cascades and falls to 6 ft with limited resting places
and plunge pools
Middle River Upstream of Devils Canyon (PRM 166.1)
PB168.7-A 172 Unnamed
Tributary 172 2012 0.4 Permanent Barrier Boulder
Cascade
Permanent anadromous barrier with multiple boulder
cascades and complex chutes
PB171.0-A 173.8 Unnamed
Tributary 173.8 2012 1.4 Permanent Barrier Complex Chute Permanent anadromous barriers due to low flow, high
gradient and complex chutes
PB171.0-B 173.8 Unnamed
Tributary 173.8 2012 1.4 Permanent Barrier Complex Chute Permanent anadromous barriers due to low flow, high
gradient and complex chutes
PB171.0-C 173.8 Unnamed
Tributary 173.8 2012 1.4 Permanent Barrier Complex Chute Permanent anadromous barriers due to low flow, high
gradient and complex chutes
PB171.0-D 173.8 Unnamed
Tributary 173.8 2012 1.4 Permanent Barrier Complex Chute Permanent anadromous barriers due to low flow, high
gradient and complex chutes
PB171.3-A 174.3 Unnamed
Tributary 174.3 2012 0.1 Permanent Barrier Complex Chute Potential barrier due to complex bedrock chutes
PB173.0-A 175.9 Unnamed 2012 0.2 Permanent Barrier Multiple Falls Permanent anadromous barrier with multiple falls > 6 ft
INITIAL STUDY REPORT STUDY OF FISH PASSAGE BARRIERS IN THE
MIDDLE AND UPPER SUSITNA RIVER AND SUSITNA TRIBUTARIES (9.12)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Part A - Page 21 June 2014
2012 Barrier ID Tributary PRM Tributary Name Survey Year Location (tributary RM) Category Barrier*/ Potential Barrier Class Description
Tributary 175.9 and limited resting places or plunge pools
PB179.1-A 181.9 Unnamed
Tributary 181.9 2012 2.8 Permanent Barrier Single Falls Permanent anadromous barrier with falls > 15 ft
PB181.2-A 184 Unnamed
Tributary 184 2012 1.8 Permanent Barrier Single Falls Permanent anadromous barrier with falls > 30 ft
PB181.8-A 184.6 Tsusena Creek 2012 3.8 Permanent Barrier Single Falls Permanent anadromous barrier with falls > 60 ft
*Preliminary barrier category based on decision tree using proposed leaping criteria for Chinook salmon (10 ft).
INITIAL STUDY REPORT STUDY OF FISH PASSAGE BARRIERS IN THE
MIDDLE AND UPPER SUSITNA RIVER AND SUSITNA TRIBUTARIES (9.12)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Part A - Page 22 June 2014
Table 4.3- 3. Major tributary mouths in the Middle River selected for fish passage barrier investigation in Study
Tributary
PRM Tributary
Focus
Area
2013; ISR
Study 9.12
Targeted for next
year of study;
ISR Study 9.12
2013; ISR
Study 6.6
Targeted for
next year;
ISR Study 6.6
Middle River Downstream of Devils Canyon
105.1 Whiskers Creek FA-104 X
110.5 Chase Creek X
113.7 Unnamed Tributary 113.7 FA-113 X
114.9 Slash Creek FA-113 X
115 Gash Creek FA-113 X
115.4 Unnamed Tributary 115.4 FA-115 n/a*
117.2 Lane Creek X+ X+
119.7 Lower McKenzie Creek X
120.2 McKenzie Creek X
121.4 Little Portage Creek X
124.4 Deadhorse Creek X
127.3 Fifth of July Creek X
128.1 Skull Creek FA-128 X
134.1 Sherman Creek X
134.3 Fourth of July Creek X
140.1 Gold Creek X+ X+
142.1 Indian River FA-141 X
144.6 Unnamed Tributary 144.6 FA-144 X
148.3 Jack Long Creek X
152.3 Portage Creek FA-151 X
Middle River Within Devils Canyon
155.9 Cheechako Creek X
160.5 Chinook Creek X
Middle River Upstream of Devils Canyon Impediment 3
164.8 Devil Creek X
Middle River Upstream of Devils Canyon (PRM 166.1)
173.8 Unnamed Tributary 173.8 FA-173 X
174.3 Unnamed Tributary 174.3 FA-173 X
179.3 Fog Creek X+ X+
184.6 Tsusena Creek FA-184 X+ X+
Notes:
* Excluded from modeling in ISR Study 6.6 based on observations during 2013 reconnaissance of low sediment
production and absence of a mouth.
+ Study 9.12 and Study 6.6 surveys on these tributaries are complimentary, focusing on tributary mouth barriers
and sediment production zones, respectively.
INITIAL STUDY REPORT STUDY OF FISH PASSAGE BARRIERS IN THE
MIDDLE AND UPPER SUSITNA RIVER AND SUSITNA TRIBUTARIES (9.12)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Part A - Page 23 June 2014
Table 4.3- 4. Tally of off-channel habitats and tributary mouths in Middle River Focus Areas targeted for data collection
to support ice-free modeling by ISR Study 8.5.
Focus Area Side Channel Side Slough Upland Slough Backwater Tributary Mouth Total
FA-104 (Whiskers Slough) 7 2 1
1 11
FA-113 (Oxbow I) 2 1 2 5
FA-115 (Slough 6A) 1
3 1 1 6
FA-128 (Slough 8A) 8 1 1
1 11
FA-138 (Gold Creek) 3 1 2
6
FA-141 (Indian River) 1
1 1 1 4
FA-144 (Slough 21) 6 1 2
1 10
FA-151 (Portage Creek)
1 1
FA-173 (Stephan Lake Complex) 4 3 2
2 11
FA-184 (Watana Dam) 2 2
Total 34 8 13 2 10 67
INITIAL STUDY REPORT STUDY OF FISH PASSAGE BARRIERS IN THE
MIDDLE AND UPPER SUSITNA RIVER AND SUSITNA TRIBUTARIES (9.12)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Part A - Page 24 June 2014
10. FIGURES
Figure 3- 1. Susitna River Study Area
INITIAL STUDY REPORT STUDY OF FISH PASSAGE BARRIERS IN THE
MIDDLE AND UPPER SUSITNA RIVER AND SUSITNA TRIBUTARIES (9.12)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Part A - Page 25 June 2014
Figure 4.2- 1. Depth/distance passage criteria for chum salmon in unobstructed uniform channels with smaller
substrates. Source ADF&G 1984b.
INITIAL STUDY REPORT STUDY OF FISH PASSAGE BARRIERS IN THE
MIDDLE AND UPPER SUSITNA RIVER AND SUSITNA TRIBUTARIES (9.12)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Part A - Page 26 June 2014
Figure 4.2- 2. Depth/distance passage criteria for chum salmon in obstructed non-uniform channels with larger substrates. (ADF&G 1984a).
INITIAL STUDY REPORT STUDY OF FISH PASSAGE BARRIERS IN THE
MIDDLE AND UPPER SUSITNA RIVER AND SUSITNA TRIBUTARIES (9.12)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Part A - Page 27 June 2014
Figure 4.3-1 a. Locations of all Upper River tributaries examined for barrier analysis in 2012 and 2013.
INITIAL STUDY REPORT STUDY OF FISH PASSAGE BARRIERS IN THE
MIDDLE AND UPPER SUSITNA RIVER AND SUSITNA TRIBUTARIES (9.12)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Part A - Page 28 June 2014
Figure 4.3-1 b. Locations of all Middle River tributary mouths examined in 2013 and planned for the next year of the study.
INITIAL STUDY REPORT STUDY OF FISH PASSAGE BARRIERS IN THE
MIDDLE AND UPPER SUSITNA RIVER AND SUSITNA TRIBUTARIES (9.12)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Part A - Page 29 June 2014
Figure 5.2- 1. Locations of beaver dams identified by aerial and ground surveys in the Middle River.
INITIAL STUDY REPORT STUDY OF FISH PASSAGE BARRIERS IN THE
MIDDLE AND UPPER SUSITNA RIVER AND SUSITNA TRIBUTARIES (9.12)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 June 2014
PART A - APPENDIX A: TRIBUTARY GEOLOGIC BARRIERS
[See separate file for Appendix.]
INITIAL STUDY REPORT STUDY OF FISH PASSAGE BARRIERS IN THE
MIDDLE AND UPPER SUSITNA RIVER AND SUSITNA TRIBUTARIES (9.12)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 June 2014
PART A - APPENDIX B: MIDDLE RIVER TRIBUTARY DELTA SURVEYS
OUTSIDE OF FOCUS AREAS
[See separate file for Appendix.]